The analysis of political leadership is an enterprise often handicapped by the lack of an adequate conceptual framework. Mr Courtney has selected James Barber's model of presidential character as a means of overcoming this problem and has presented an interesting examination of Mackenzie King's political leadership based on this approach. There are, however, a number of aspects both of the Barber model and of Mackenzie King's leadership that Courtney has been unable to develop. It is proposed in this brief rejoinder to discuss some of these issues and to indicate the main lines of an alternative interpretation of Mr King's character.